New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-01-25
rnr R1InMIN MERLER CASE.

In November. 1885. William Baldwin, OF
Kansas, was found guilty of the murder OF his
sister Mary. The prosecution had only CIR
cumstantal evidence TO proceed upon. Inc
deceased was found dead in her bed, with a
pillow on her face, and bottle which had CON
tanned chloroform beside her A panel had
been cut out Of the kitchcn-door apparently
with knife. Ii was sought To show that the
prisoner had been endeavorng 70 get some
money from his sister. Their mother had writ
ten 10 Mary the day before the death OF the
latter advising her TO let William have $500
to help pay off mortgage on his house. Lit
tic other evidence than this was produced Tor
the people The defendant however. was not
examined, and probably this fact went against
him. 1t WINS said that he had been wild. Let
ters were introduced indicating that he hni
worried his mother and sister considerably with
solicitations of pccuniary help. In one OF them
the deceased girl said she supposed he would
not stop until he had got all the mothers and
most Of her fortune but the absence Of
sufficient motive for SO unnatural a crime was
not overcome.
1t WAS proved that the defendant had nothing
to hope financially from his sisters death, since
in that event all her fortune would revert TO
her mother. This had been fully explained 10
William Baldwin by the Probate Judge at the
time the fathers estate was administered upon
The theory Of the defence was that the crime
had been committed by burglar though there
were no other evidences Of burglary in the
house. The jury rejected that hypothesis, and
convicted the defendant, and the Supreme Court
of Kansas, on an appeal. confirmed the sentence
| tha oh No in tbcir
however, say alt must he admitted that tho
evidence of the defendants guilt is not entirely
conclusive, but 1t is Of such nature that hon
est and intelligent men might dilIcr in opinions
as to its suiliciency to justify verdict Of
guilty" "The Albany Law Journal" com
mcnting on this says: In view Of the facts,
| this conclusion seems incredible. The
| learned Court say the evidence is mot entirely
conclusive We believe that nine lawyers out
of every ten In the United States would rather
say that it does not even cast the shadow of a
suspicion on the defendant" That is, perhaps.
putting the case too strongly, because it is evil
dent That good many lawyers have held tic
| evidence 10 he damaging. But certainly It's
concusiveness is so much open to doubt that
the affirmation of the conviction by tho Su-
prcme Court is a surprise.
Another attempt is to he made TO secure
rchcaring and though the spme court has to
pass upon the motion which so recently af-
imed tho sentence. hcpe is entertained that
on the admission Of the Judges themselves the
object sought may be conceded Certainly if
the Court does not regard the evidence as con-
chisive-and it has SAID rs mucll-it ought not
To refuse a rehearing which, if the defendant is
guilty, Is not at all likely to purge him. Where
as If he is not guilty. the refusal of a rchcarino
will entail very ugly responsibility. Cicum-
stantial evidence at the best is full Of trans and
pitfalls. II is liable even when il seems most
complete to suggest totally wrong conclusions,
and where it is not complete it may b. morc
misleading than no evidence at all would bc.
In the Baldwin case there appears to be quite
enough uncertainty to justify, nay, to demand,
rctrial, and tho Kansas Supreme Court has
moro to gain by manfcsting libcrality of spirit,
even though some sacrifice OF personal pride
bc involved. than by inilexbly pcsistng in a
position which even upon the showing of the
Court itself is anything but secure.